Search results

A single Army Group in 1941 needed in theory 30 trains per day. Auschwitz at its absolute max during the extermination of the Jews in Hungary received 2-3 trains per day, in 1944 when the war was lost. As mentioned above, the coal economy alone consumed a thousand times more cars and locomotives...

The Holocaust's effect on German rolling stock was minimal.

Even fully unhindered by Malta, the ports of Benghazi, Tripoli, and Tobruk didn't have the capacity to support what was in Africa IOTL, much less significant reinforcements. Source is Martin Crevald, Supplying War.

Causes difficulties due to a resulting shortage of spare parts for turreted vehicles in the field and the time it takes to shift production over to different vehicles.

The Germans tried to recruit Ukrainians voluntarily and failed, the result being that they resorted to Sauckel's methods of forced recruitment. The problems were twofold. First, the regional economy of Ukraine was so integrated with the rest of the Soviet Union that the Germans decided to...

The second big factor was that war with Britain was still going on, and Stalin was convinced that Hitler wouldn't launch a two front war. He further assumed that the intelligence he was receiving was British provocation. It's possible to get a month's worth of preparation in at best, but to get...

Ukraine already collaborated significantly IOTL. Millions were forcibly or voluntarily shipped to Germany as labor, and an SS division was made up of Ukrainians. Sure there were no armies of Ukrainians, but that's as much a problem of language barriers and the cost of training/feeding/equipping...

Master of the House gives a good picture of Stalin's total control over his government. There was never really a split in Stalin's governent or opposing factions; everyone was cowed into submission. Stalin carefully orchestrated everything, including the Terror, in order to ensure loyalty and...

Apologies for being harsh, timelines that have Germany defeat, or seem to indicate that it will defeat, the Soviet Union with ease are a pet peeve of mine. Not sure if there's anything academic online, plenty of results citing good sources. One of the most telling actions by Stalin is his...

Yes he does; Stalin felt a personal connection with Hitler which in large part contributed to his trust. He also deeply distrusted other German leaders, Party and military. Change the leader in power and you change the relationship between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. And I don't care if...

That was just one option I thought of. But the Germans don't have the material to launch an offensive there while defending Kotluban and reinforcing the Caucasus and AGC. At most you're looking at two extra panzer divisions freed up (14th and 16th) along with 9th Panzer and 3rd motorized which...

It's unlikely that the Germans would commit their released reserves for such a minor offensive. It's far more likely that they're sent to reinforce the Caucasus and Army Group Center (9th Panzer Division was sent IOTL). The Soviet forces on the flanks are still viewed as minor problems compared...

At the very least TTL Barbarossa would be far less ambitious and in the end destroy far less of the Red Army and seize less land. Plus I find it unrealistic that the Soviet Union would do worse ITTL if Britain is defeated and a man Stalin trusts less is in power in Germany. This leads to a long...

Regardless of the success of the Kotluban Offensives, they were vicious and (To 6th Army) dangerous enough that they tied down 2/3 of its strength even during the height of the Stalingrad battle. Further, even in November 1942 the Germans continued to concentrate their attention and strength in...

German forces are wasted defending the Kotluban region, in the Caucasus, and trying to take Astrakhan. The Germans were distinctly ignorant of potential Soviet threats along the Don.

1. Starving the Soviet population was necessary to feed the Ostheer. 2. Also frees up Soviet men and material. 3. Best defended axis of advance, and trying to concentrate so many men along so few railways and roads will cripple the offensive. 4. Would require major alterations to...

If the Germans were "rational" they never would have launched Barbarossa in the first place. Creveld in Supplying War points out that the entire plan required them to ignore reality, waving aside "overcautious" concerns and statistics and relying on delusions of racial superiority. A limited...

It's unproven that Stalin ever sent out any peace feelers, much less whether they were serious. The most we have are a few claims in memoirs and a copious amount of unsourced claims from historians, but no documentary evidence. The only concrete discussion was in Sweden prior to Kursk, but...

If it is assumed that the war will be long and costly then an operation like Barbarossa makes no sense and more limited objectives, less damaging to the Red Army, must be pursued. It was an all-in gamble which succeeded in its first stage, the Border Battles, only through the most extreme...

If the Germans were "rational" they never would have launched Barbarossa in the first place. Creveld in Supplying War points out that the entire plan required them to ignore reality, waving aside "overcautious" concerns and statistics. A limited, less ambitious plan would be out of the question...